65 Responses to this entry

what is annoying is not that are writing about it but what they have chosen to lump with it. Pat Buchanan..no. As usual, they put Richard Spencer in the middle of the hub even though many on the non-mainstream right don’t like him and or have only just tangentially anything to do with him.

— is a coalition comprised of movements like neo-reaction, certain strands of libertarianism, tech triumphalism, and even the extreme-populist wing of the Republican Party. All share with Spencer’s white-ethno-nativism the ideals of isolationism, protectionism, and nationalism: a closed nation-state.

No kidding. And they made a point of mentioning Marcus Aurelius — which, in particular, does absolutely nothing to make the Alt-Right look bad. In fact it does precisely the opposite: If Marcus Aurelius — who, more than any other man, most perfectly embodied the solid masculine virtues — is associated with the Alt-Right, then fair-minded men must look favorably upon it.

For all that, Marcus Aurelius is very rarely discussed in Alt-Right circles. I think that the person who prepared that graphic name-dropped him for no reason. Very stupid.

“The most interesting of the Stoics is Marcus Aurelius. Lord Acton, the great English philosopher and historian, once said that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” and that’s generally speaking true. The difficulty with that generalization is… Marcus Aurelius. Marcus Aurelius was an absolute ruler, he was a ruler of the Roman Empire, he was an emperor. He had absolute power of life and death over everyone in the known world…. Now, for almost all the Roman Emperors, they lived scandalous lives and they disgraced themselves, they were much more concerned with indulging their sensual appetites, satisfying their passions, flying into rages. Marcus Aurelius is the standing exception to that and to the exception to Lord Acton’s generalization. In his case, power didn’t corrupt – absolute power did not corrupt absolutely – instead, absolute power allowed us to see what the man underneath the body is really like, it allowed us to find out what Marcus Aurelius’s soul is like. Imagine a man for whom all the restraints of Law and Custom and Political Order are taken away… he can have whatever he wants… If a man under those circumstances behaves well you know something about the soul underneath, because no external constraint is making him do what he is doing, and Marcus Aurelius is the one example of an absolute ruler who behaves himself in such a way that he doesn’t disgrace himself. It’s an amazing temptation; imagine what it’s like: stop and think, put yourself in that place for a second. Marcus Aurelius takes the throne in 161 A. D. and he dies in 180 A. D.–nineteen years controlling the entire world…..”

Granted these types (Frederick II being another one) are rare, but that’s what the Moldbuggian profit-incentive is for: half-Aureliuses who need that little boost to counteract the human will to egoism.

Is one of the shittiest sayings of history. It’s mumbo. Power does not corrupt, it’s neutral. It’s simply increased reach and ability. The corruption is there if the person has power or not. It’s just far more noticable if somone has power to exert the relatively prenatally disposed corruption. Humanity knew this until recently, that people are born with disposition. This mumbo is quite mal-Modernistic.

It’s about as dumb as “money is the root of all evil.”

Obviously the evil (miserly greed, backstabbing, abuse, contractbreaking; you know—how the corrupted African politican will run things) is an abstraction of and the result of preceding and inferior biosocial processes. I’ve seen animals refuse to share food even though there is enough of it, they just don’t know there’s enough for long so there’s internal tension pressuring them to guard it. They have low overall prediction and creativity so they can’t predict based on observation they’ll get more food tomorrow nor plan to create it or such a situation, it’s similar with African : they’re not entirely sure they can produce high value by co-operating, like High Whites can, so the Afros have to behave like my cats and hoard all the food (value) to a few Bosses and thus the society gets soo starved (quite beyond Austerity isn’t it) that overall productivity is retarded. Hence you get frequently-seen African Boss-Man. Unfortuntely this behavior is seen also in niggardly “whites.” Corruption is just an abstraction of a biological cycle. Evil is an abstraction of its cause. Its cause is just laws of physics. Randomness n’ shiet. Throw of dice. We can’t all be the same, hence difference. Hence a spectrum of differentiation. Yin & yang in how many varitation of combination per instance of effector abstracted.* Some niggas get the bad luck. Some niggas get wise. Get vaccinated, my logo branded on your skin

* —» Because of maya-shakti, differentiation prevails over identity, and the content of experience becomes autonomous. The transparency of universal “pure knowledge,” as well as bindu (the transcendental dot that includes all the possibilities of the manifestation), is now broken down into the three relatively distinct aspects of knower, known, and knowledge. Bindu, through the dyad (maya), becomes a triad, the so-called triple point, tribindu. This is the general scheme or archetype of every finite experience.
At this level a split occurs, as in the case of a person standing between two mirrors, whose every movement would be reproduced in two distinct yet perfectly identical images. On the one hand, we have the spiritual series under the aegis of the Shaivist principle. On the other hand, we have the real or material series under the aegis of the Shaktic principle.
Here it is necessary to mention the gunas. We previously learned that in the Sankhya system the gunas are the three powers constituting prakriti and operating in Shakti’s productions. In Tantric metaphysics, which does not consider prakriti a self-subsistent principle, the gunas assume a different meaning. They correspond to various modalities of shakti, which come into play once the ongoing process has led one beyond the metaphysical “point,” that is, beyond ishvara-tattva. The three gunas are called sattva, rajas, and tamas. Sattva comes from the word sat, which means “being.” The term designates the elements reflecting the stable and luminous nature of being, and it is usually associated with Shiva’s nature. Tamas, on the contrary, denotes what is fixed in the opposite sense of a stiffening, or of an automatism (e.g., passive staticity, sheer passivity, the force of inertia, weight, mass, a limiting and obscuring power). Tamas presides over every depleted process and over inactive potentialities. Rajas, conversely, symbolizes dynamism, becoming, transformation, change, and expansion; it corresponds to what we usually designate as energy, life, or activity. Rajas may also be influenced by the other two principles. On the one hand, when it is influenced by sattva, rajas appears in the guise of an ascending and ever-expanding force, in virtue of which a given form or being becomes and develops. On the other hand, when it is influenced by tamas, rajas appears as the force acting in the processes of alteration, fall, and dissolution. The variety of the world’s beings and forms derives from the dynamic and constant interaction of the three gunas, which are constantly undergoing transformation and-change. Therefore, in several Hindu doctrines the gunas are adopted as reference points not only by the science of nature (the final result being a qualitative physics similar to that promoted by Aristotle) but also by classifications according to types and characters. Differences among beings are caused by the various ways in which the three gunas relate. Because of the three gunas’ interaction the purushic principle appears in the manifested world under various forms. »

I scratch my head at you, Erik. You prefer to deliver your scientific racism in old-fashioned mythico-poetic form (to me, H. P. Lovecraft still remains unrivaled) while synchronously dabbling in Hinduism, what I believe Hegel called, “the maddest of all polytheisms.”

Whatsamadder, don’t ye have enuf Gods in yer Norse mythology??

G. Eiríksson Reply:May 2nd, 2017 at 12:17 pm

Rg Veda

BOOK IX [Book Nine]

HYMN XLI. Soma Pavamana.

1. ACTIVE and bright have they come forth, impetuous in speed like bulls,
Driving the black skin far away.
2 Quelling the riteless Dasyu, may we think upon the bridge of bliss,
Leaving the bridge of woe behind.

HYMN LXXIII. Soma Pavamana.

5 O’er Sire and Mother they have roared in unison bright with the verse of praise, burning up riteless men,
Blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates.

— » Rigveda is one of the oldest extant texts in any Indo-European language.[13] Philological and linguistic evidence indicate that the Rigveda was composed in the north-western region of the Indian subcontinent, most likely between c. 1500 and 1200 BC,[14][15][16] though a wider approximation of c. 1700–1100 BC has also been given.[17][18] »

«The Artic Home in the Vedas» is worth a glance. Guénon wouldn’t call any of this Hinduism, but the Rigveda is » one of the four canonical sacred texts (śruti) of “Hinduism” known as the Vedas. » The concept of Veda predates “Hindu” by millennia. » 1660s, from Persian Hindu (adjective and noun) “Indian,” from Hind “India,” from Sanskrit sindhu “river,” meaning here the Indus; hence “region of the Indus,” the sense then gradually was extended by invading peoples to encompass all northern India. “Properly, one of the native race in India descended from the Aryan conquerors. … More loosely, the name includes also the non-Aryan inhabitants of India” [Century Dictionary, 1902]. As an adjective from 1690s. »

‘Veda’ is cognate with its much younger brother ‘video’-descended from Latin; in fact its root is ‘vid-’ and both descend from proto-Aryan (PIE) ‘*weid-’: “to see” —— as does English ‘wit’ and Icelandic ‘vit’. : )

I’m probably too liberal for that. But you can definitely classify people into four types of main vocations like that. I mean, people will fit one or the other more. When I was in my twenties I was fascinated by the western analogue to the kshatriya.

But always mostly into the original: the (heathen) warrior-priest, such as in Roman families. But these days are gone by. Fleshfighting is stupid.

So I’m mostly just bourgeoise nowadays. Householder. Technologist. I have a different working with the extra-mundane. Why not just enjoy life? That’s no less a sacred value than strenuousness. Of course, as the royal-sacerdotal mix, I cannot enjoy life without feeling I am doing my best to exert good influence. Telling the truth already does a lot, since lying is such a compounding corrupting influence for us monkeys.

God grants me good music.

I think Moldbug was right to re-translate the castes. More should be done on it.

pete Reply:May 2nd, 2017 at 3:20 pm

Marcus Aurelius is always one of the first five names mentioned in any /pol/ thread about book recommendations.

“The English critical theorist turned far-right cult thinker Nick Land is usefully representative of this intellectual tendency. Although he has never identified as a transhumanist, his ideas are infused with the movement’s delirious faith in the coming merger of humans and machines. His current political vision, which he has given the flamboyantly portentous title the Dark Enlightenment, is one in which the programmer elite and their ingenious technologies rule the world.”

I think the liberal noobs are brilliant to bring things like Jane Austen and Fight Club into this because the materials of the alt-right do not form a coherent doxology but are merely an assemblage of dispositions which add all up, in my estimation, to one patriachical abreaction.

I just want to know: Where is Joseph McCarthy when you need him? They gave admin a placard but no photo, only a thin line downward from Peter Thiel. Is this the techno-commercial avant gaarde? They should’ve had James Ellroy do a rewrite, their all over the place. Ellroy in a recent interview said: “I like going back to another time and getting lost in it. And living, as immediately as I can, the lives of the tormented …” That seems to sum up and summon these lost leftists whose gumshoe agenda and hacks wages have produced nothing but a second hand dime novel for the double-speak ironists of the New York Magazine.

“We should further consider, that the very blemishes and defects of Nature are not without their use, in that they make an agreeable sort of variety, and augment the beauty of the rest of the creation, as shades in a picture serve to set off the brighter and more enlightened parts.” (Berkeley)

—» Through access initiatives, chief among them dismantling of stigma, it is my hope that both reporting and treatment of mental illness will rise to levels that rival those for physical illness. That said, I believe that certain technologies will provide new opportunities and solutions. One advance thatr we are working on currently leverages “FitBit-like” monitoring of mental health and well-being in combination with anonymous, virtual treatment paradigms to allow anyone to get help assessing their emotional state and receiving care in real time.
Another approach that we are interested in exploring involves the use of neuromodulatory interventions such as transcranial magnetic stimulation to augment other therapies. »

I hope to God the SPLC is completely irrelevant to the average person at some point in my life, sooner the better too. That intellectual dishonesty, rigged strategy, and gleeful distortion of the facts is inexcusable. Every time I feel lost, I remember groups like the SPLC and their intellectual dishonesty and it reminds me that I’m quite glad things are going our way now.

It’s kind of fun to look at the little snippets of why we think the way we do that the article fails to mention. There are many. It just casually, innocently leaves these things out. I wonder why that is? I wonder why the “thinker” ceases here. What would the motivation be to “stop short?” Perhaps cowardice, disgraceful stupidity, being a hack, or a stupid motherfucker (all of the above).

No mercy for these twats. Nor their readers. What a fucking stupid, sellout, dipshit, anti-intellectual, pandering, thoughtless bozo. I can’t even imagine living like that. Just writing and living for the approval of others, never turning my brain on and just thinking and challenging myself. I can’t even imagine it. Kind of like looking into the face of a dog that has just shat on your carpet and refuses to sit when asked. A stupid, dumbfounded gaze like some kind of three cell organism for a brief moment. Such people walk this earth, and apparently represent the most highly esteemed New York periodicals. Well, it only makes sense when they are being hired and overseen by similarly dog headed fascist morons. A big club of soda slurping leather skinned morons who don’t think, but smell green paper like snakes licking the air. They can be reduced to a very simple series of processes. They certainly don’t care about reality, or truth. They are very simple people, much as dogs or ticks are simple. We should learn to treat them similarly, with a quiet love for their slow simplicity.

I think what’s going on is Euros/wypipo are so superior that we are expected to be modest so as to not cripple the self-esteem of the “sleepy races” (as pre-war right-hegelians called them). So when these globalists/Jews see someone like Molyneux drinking a glass of milk in a video they think “You pig, how dare you hurt the feelings of these poor jungle savages.” Which I guess is understandable if you know how women think. But eventually one doesn’t want to tell sugar-coated lies anymore!